1952 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2000 Caterham 21
To start off, 2000 Caterham 21 is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 2,441 cc (4 cylinders), 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Caterham 21 (230 HP @ 8600 RPM) has 125 more horse power than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Caterham 21 should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 990 kg more than 2000 Caterham 21.
Let's talk about torque, 2000 Caterham 21 (210 Nm @ 7200 RPM) has 26 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2000 Caterham 21 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2000 Caterham 21 | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Caterham |
| Model | Tickford | 21 |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2441 cc | 1794 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 230 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 8600 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 210 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 7200 RPM |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 540 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 3860 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1590 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2230 mm |
